How can these episodes (from TNG, DS9, and ENT) be canon any longer?

[Longinus]

The world building and the technical aspects of the franchise have always been a big part of appeal of the Star Trek and it is disingenuous to pretend that this is not the case. Various technical manuals and fan made databases of ships have always been popular. To many fans treating the setting as 'real', trying to figure out details and specs of things has been important, so it is perfectly understandable that those people are not entirely satisfied with 'Dracula's castle' approach, where the technical details do not really matter, or indeed even exist in any permanent sense.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

There were some lame-ass fandom explanations along the way, though. Like that TOS Klingons were genetic "fusions" made to better deal the humans (and they also had romulan "fusions" as well, apparently.

That wasn't a fandom explanation. It's from John Ford's novel The Final Reflection and the FASA games that came out around the same time (Which I think Ford worked on in some capacity, IIRC).

 

[Mysterion]

That wasn't a fandom explanation. It's from John Ford's novel The Final Reflection and the FASA games that came out around the same time (Which I think Ford worked on in some capacity, IIRC).

Ok. Misremembered the source. Mea culpa. Still makes no real sense, though.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Ok. Misremembered the source. Mea culpa. Still makes no real sense, though.

Why not? It's not really any more far-fetched than a Vulcan/human hybrid.

 

[fireproof78]

so it is perfectly understandable that those people are not entirely satisfied with 'Dracula's castle' approach, where the technical details do not really matter, or indeed even exist in any permanent sense.

But that's a fan expectation and not incumbent upon the producers to cooperate with it.

I get the dissatisfaction to a degree, but where I disagree is how it impacts enjoyment of the story.

 

[Longinus]

But that's a fan expectation and not incumbent upon the producers to cooperate with it.

So? This applies to everything. Producers do a thing, people either like it or not for various reasons.

I get the dissatisfaction to a degree, but where I disagree is how it impacts enjoyment of the story.

What is there to disagree with? It is personal, it affects different people differently. That you don't care about something doesn't mean that other people are somehow 'wrong' to care about it.

 

[Greg Cox]

The world building and the technical aspects of the franchise have always been a big part of appeal of the Star Trek and it is disingenuous to pretend that this is not the case. Various technical manuals and fan made databases of ships have always been popular. To many fans treating the setting as 'real', trying to figure out details and specs of things has been important, so it is perfectly understandable that those people are not entirely satisfied with 'Dracula's castle' approach, where the technical details do not really matter, or indeed even exist in any permanent sense.

I like to think that it's simply a matter of keeping things in perspective. I enjoy looking at beautifully illustrated maps and charts, too. Heck, my "Owners Workshop Manual" to the U.S.S. Enterprise is resting at my left hand as I type this and my dog-eared copy of the Star Trek Encyclopedia is at my feet. But I think there's something to be said for remembering that, ultimately, the Enterprise is no more "real" than Dracula's castle so why let the background details get in the way of enjoying an exciting new STAR TREK show or movie? Or get hung up on whether it's "canon" or "Prime" or "real Trek"? (Like the guy I mentioned who couldn't get into the 2009 movie because the insignia on the costumes were "wrong.")

Or maybe I'm just a curmudgeon who wonders when we all started taking this whole "canon" business quite so bloody seriously, and not just with regards to STAR TREK.

 

[fireproof78]

So? This applies to everything. Producers do a thing, people either like it or not for various reasons.


What is there to disagree with? It is personal, it affects different people differently. That you don't care about something doesn't mean that other people are somehow 'wrong' to care about it.

Who said "wrong?" To quote a song there is no good guy, there is no bad guy. We just disagree and that's OK.

 

[Daddy Todd]

Or maybe I'm just a curmudgeon who wonders when we all started taking this whole "canon" business quite so bloody seriously, and not just with regards to STAR TREK.

Well, I believe the Spanish Inquisition took a different canon quite seriously.

I think it’s a reflection of our times. Fandom Wars can be seen as a proxy for a sharply divided electorate. Massive societal change is challenging, and we’re in the middle of societal change on an unprecedented scale. Some people cope by going fundamentalist. Other cope in different ways.

“We”, of course, being defined as “Western Liberal Democratic Societies”.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

I like to think that it's simply a matter of keeping things in perspective. I enjoy looking at beautifully illustrated maps and charts, too. Heck, my "Owners Workshop Manual" to the U.S.S. Enterprise is resting at my left hand as I type this and my dog-eared copy of the Star Trek Encyclopedia is at my feet. But I think there's something to be said for remembering that, ultimately, the Enterprise is no more "real" than Dracula's castle so why let the background details get in the way of enjoying an exciting new STAR TREK show or movie? Or get hung up on whether it's "canon" or "Prime" or "real Trek"? (Like the guy I mentioned who couldn't get into the 2009 movie because the insignia on the costumes were "wrong.")

Or maybe I'm just a curmudgeon who wonders when we all started taking this whole "canon" business quite so bloody seriously, and not just with regards to STAR TREK.

Extreme viewpoints aside, why do you imagine things being bound to get in the way of one another? I can moderately enjoy DSC’s predictable, safe storytelling and think about the scenery at the same time, then go online for background info and discussions of detail. It’s all part of an interactive, multimedia fandom experience, which is different from the casual channel-surfing experience. You’re not going to enter a biology forum and say why bother with that terminology debate, go out and enjoy nature instead! Can’t we have both?

 

[1001001]

Extreme viewpoints aside, why do you imagine things being bound to get in the way of one another? I can moderately enjoy DSC’s predictable, safe storytelling and think about the scenery at the same time, then go online for background info and discussions of detail. It’s all part of an interactive, multimedia fandom experience, which is different from the casual channel-surfing experience. You’re not going to enter a biology forum and say why bother with that terminology debate, go out and enjoy nature instead! Can’t we have both?

Biology is, you know....real.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

Biology is, you know....real.

And Star Trek world building is designed to approach reality (minus dramatic caveats and production gaffes), which becomes especially interesting when it’s a minutely designed sci-fi reality as opposed to something everyday from a contemporary show. Designers spend a lot of time thinking it through before putting it out there, fans want to see that and reconcile inconsistent pieces.

 

[1001001]

Designers spend a lot of time thinking it through before putting it out there, fans want to see that and reconcile inconsistent pieces.

This is the main problem throughout this thread: you keep making declarative statements as if they are fact.

I'm sure some fans care about that. Certainly not all. I doubt even most. Or many, for that matter.

If you care about technical minutiae of a pretend world, then great. More power to you. I don't see it as something worth getting upset about IMHO.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

This is the main problem throughout this thread: you keep making declarative statements as if they are fact.

I'm sure some fans care about that. Certainly not all. I doubt even most. Or many, for that matter.

If you care about technical minutiae of a pretend world, then great. More power to you. I don't see it as something worth getting upset about IMHO.

Well, I said “fans”, not “all fans” or even “most fans”. Perhaps “some fans”? Fewer than 5,000 in 2019?

There are fans who can’t handle change and get upset rather than invent new classifications, but there are also fans looking in and rolling their eyes at what they see as pointless discussion rather than part of an interactive fandom experience which need not concern them specifically, just as games like STO don’t concern me in turn: I’ll look in from time to time and point out that STO isn’t canon, or that certain designs could be more original, but if someone wants to get into detailed gaming discussions, that’s up to them and part of a different interactive fandom experience.

I wouldn’t say I’m upset as long as I see fans of various interests acknowledging that other fans have different interests, without suggesting that the proper way to watch ST is that of the casual viewer enjoying a story or not, like I might watch the latest Lost in Space reboot.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I’ll look in from time to time and point out that STO isn’t canon, or that certain designs could be more original...

But God forbid if those original designs don't exactly jibe with every single thing that ever came before.

 

[Nyotarules]

It worked fine for me.

I dunno. Think it pretty much just sat there until ENT came along. There were some lame-ass fandom explanations along the way, though. Like that TOS Klingons were genetic "fusions" made to better deal the humans (and they also had romulan "fusions" as well, apparently.

They came up with an expo for why all those TOS/TNG aliens looked like your average European human in The Chase. I guess there had to be a reason why the Federation flagship in TNG looked like NASA in space with nothing UFP about it, apart from Dr Selar who came and went.

 

[fireproof78]

I could get in to interactive discussions all day long regarding canon. I could bore people to death with my head canon interpretations, how I make it all work together in a way that makes sense for me. I could recite how prior Star Trek's have handled such discrepancies.

Ultimately, for me, I want to reduce the amount of barriers to personal enjoyment. That's why I take a very "Schrodinger's Canon" approach to what I watch. When I'm discussing it I am more than happy to get lost in the details of it all. But, if it acts as a barrier to personal enjoyment while watching it then I move it to the back burner.

That's where I come from. There is no right or wrong way to interact with media, but if things get in the way of enjoyment then I'm going to ask a lot of questions. After all, Star Trek is meant to entertain.

 

[Nyotarules]

Well, I believe the Spanish Inquisition took a different canon quite seriously.

I think it’s a reflection of our times. Fandom Wars can be seen as a proxy for a sharply divided electorate. Massive societal change is challenging, and we’re in the middle of societal change on an unprecedented scale. Some people cope by going fundamentalist. Other cope in different ways.

“We”, of course, being defined as “Western Liberal Democratic Societies”.

Its the ultimate first world problem - arguing over a fictional, sci fi universe set 300 years from now. Sad or funny?
Now let me get my ruler out and measure the angle of T'Pol's brows to see if they match with TOS Spock. See you later!

 

[Boris Skrbic]

But God forbid if those original designs don't exactly jibe with every single thing that ever came before.

Why? I just said the fun is all about researching and reconciling whatever doesn’t jibe. That’s the experience (though I tend to focus on canon, non-STO designs). It would be boring if everything were perfect and documented. Even DSC fits if you think of it as another reality on the Prime Timeline skeleton.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

Its the ultimate first world problem - arguing over a fictional, sci fi universe set 300 years from now. Sad or funny?
Now let me get my ruler out and measure the angle of T'Pol's brows to see if they match with TOS Spock. See you later!

You’d prefer to move somewhere you wouldn’t have time for detail-oriented hobbies?

(BTW, this is one example of the unwarranted ridicule I mentioned above.)